>I have never read Rimmer, so I find this interesting.
>
>So some ruminations on what you wrote. It fits what little I have
>read about
>Rimmer, that he was not consistent. I have read Price though, and
>although he
>was convinced that the flood was global and responsible for the geological
>record, and that life was created recently, as I remember he was
>prepared to
>concede an old earth and universe. Perhaps therefore it is unfair
>for me to
>call him a true YEC, even though Morris et al are his intellectual
>children and
>he doubtless would be at home in their company.

What I am seeing in what I am reading is that today's categories don't
really fit yesterday's theorists very well. If one merely looks at the
arguments used for various positions by these guys, one will see amazing
similarities. If one looks at the total package held by the individuals,
things were different. THis is because they were responding to different
issues, different situations and a different knowledge base than today.

For instance, I don't see human origin being much of an issue until after
DArwin and after fossil man began to be found. And I suspect, but can't
prove that anthropology began to break down the old earth-young-humanity
view by showing Neanderthal and modern man lived longer ago than the view
could tolerate.